Gas Octane

[K4fxd]

Note; the VP 40:1 packaged fuel is 6-12% Isopentane !

Yep, good stuff! But 32 dollars a gallon

Sponsored

 

[GregO]

Yep, good stuff! But 32 dollars a gallon

Ya, it’s nuts what they charge. That’s why the Wash N Go Juice recipe is so popular in certain circles of off road and performance small engine groups.
Add a splash of Isopentane and you’re at 5-6 bucks a gallon with 2T 40:1 ratio.

 

[SnowFox]

93 without a doubt. The reality is it's more stable. And modern cars have been required to be able to run gas with ethanol up to xx% for over a decade now.

 

[sk47]

Hello; Lots of good information in this thread. As is usual some varying opinions. Not sure when ethanol added to general fuel supplies started but think my 2001 car was rated to use it. Has the plastic gas tank and all. But I will need to do some checking if anyone disputes this as I am not sure.
I thought back when the ethanol in gas started such was a poor idea. Turning food grains into a fuel caused problems. At one point I kept an issue of one of the decent scientific journals from around 2002. Had an long article about the process. Back then the contention was almost as much gasoline/diesel was consumed in growing, transporting and distilling the ethanol as was gained in alcohol fuel supply. I cannot specify but have long suspected it is another "follow the money" bit of pork. But the program has persisted.

I use to rebuild carbs on neighborhood lawn mowers a few years ago. Even had to go into the carbs on my push mowers often. I suspect the really old mowers were not made for much alcohol. I started using marine formula fuel stabilizer in my own mowers and the issues are much reduced the last few years. I have one fairly new mower( about four summers now) which has so far run fine on 10% ethanol gas. My very old Murry (+20 years old) is getting a bit tired but i have not been into the carb for a few years now.

 

[Hack]

...

which is relevant what, over 5500 RPM and full-tilt throttle?

Knock is worse at lower RPM, because there's more time for it to happen. You need the throttle open some, but it doesn't have to be full open. Usually mid throttle on a hill is worst case, from what I've read.

Who the hell drives Wot on public streets? But point taken.

You bought a Mustang and don't push the gas pedal down? Not even on an on-ramp to the freeway? Just briefly?

 

[K4fxd]

93 without a doubt.

Depends on what you are looking for. A long trip on the freeway and I'd love to get e0 87. Unless the cost was more than the mileage increase.

 

[shogun32]

bought a Mustang and don't push the gas pedal down? Not even on an on-ramp to the freeway? Just briefly?

The car gets smartly to 80mph at far less throttle. So more is not useful. Plus the roads are never empty and several of the on ramps that lend themselves to more throttle have poor sightlines, bad pavement or a lights-out statie sitting in wait for some fool to try.

I don't use big throttle so much as use less brake. I go fast in the corners.

 

[K4fxd]

a lights-out statie sitting in wait for some fool to try.

At least for now on ramps are a wink wink. Unless you are really stupid they let us have fun.

 

[Buldawg76]

Just don't forget there are cameras in use almost everywhere nowadays especially on interstates and on ramps so smokey doesn't necessarily have to be sitting in wait to catch you.

BD

 

[SnowFox]

Depends on what you are looking for. A long trip on the freeway and I'd love to get e0 87. Unless the cost was more than the mileage increase.

I would still go 93 imho. On a tight Tolerance high compression ratio engine like the Coyotes. I will take stability Everytime.

But everyone has a reason for whatever they choose. As long as it's within spec for the car and its what you prefer no wrong answer.

 

[Pws6]

Just don't forget there are cameras in use almost everywhere nowadays especially on interstates and on ramps so smokey doesn't necessarily have to be sitting in wait to catch you.

BD

Luckily some states are smart enough to outlaw speed cameras

 

[sk47]

Hello; One of the reasons I started looking for a Mustang as a bucket list car was that they ran on 87 octane gas. Also as stated

Plus the roads are never empty and several of the on ramps that lend themselves to more throttle have poor sightlines, bad pavement or a lights-out statie sitting in wait for some fool to try.

I don't use big throttle so much as use less brake. I go fast in the corners.

I also find the roads often crowded and smokey lurking around. I like acceleration but like handling even more. Also, Ford did not take a government handout during the 2007 era financial crisis.
Mostly I wanted a Mustang when young and could not afford to have one. Now I can and it must be a V8.
Had an 1989 F-150 with the 300 six. I used 87 in one tank & 91 in the other. Light loads and regular driving the 87 was fine. Heavy load or tow I would switch to the 91 tank especially on some of the grades in my area.
If I was to hammer on the engine I would consider the higher octane fuel to help avoid preignition (detonation-knock-pinging). For regular driving and the occasional burst of speed 87 ought to do fine. Which brings me to the reason for this post. I have not shopped for a Mustang for a couple years or so. Last i looked they were rated to run on 87 octane fuel. Is this still the case?

 

[Pws6]

Hello; One of the reasons I started looking for a Mustang as a bucket list car was that they ran on 87 octane gas. Also as stated

I also find the roads often crowded and smokey lurking around. I like acceleration but like handling even more. Also, Ford did not take a government handout during the 2007 era financial crisis.
Mostly I wanted a Mustang when young and could not afford to have one. Now I can and it must be a V8.
Had an 1989 F-150 with the 300 six. I used 87 in one tank & 91 in the other. Light loads and regular driving the 87 was fine. Heavy load or tow I would switch to the 91 tank especially on some of the grades in my area.
If I was to hammer on the engine I would consider the higher octane fuel to help avoid preignition (detonation-knock-pinging). For regular driving and the occasional burst of speed 87 ought to do fine. Which brings me to the reason for this post. I have not shopped for a Mustang for a couple years or so. Last i looked they were rated to run on 87 octane fuel. Is this still the case?

Ford definitely took money in 2007. 5.7 billion to be exact

 

[GregO]

Ford definitely took money in 2007. 5.7 billion to be exact

They classified it as funding for EV R&D I believe.

 

[Pws6]

They classified it as funding for EV R&D I believe.

Yeah and it was taken and repaid as a credit line, but to be clear they did 100% take money from the government

Sponsored